Killing the rule of law softly on immigration

posted at 4:31 pm on March 29, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

At the Corner, Mark Krikorian catches John Sandweg (previously of Immigration and Customs Enforcement) in the act of putting forward proposals which would effectively eliminate his own former job.

Sandweg, a criminal defense attorney and Arizona crony of Janet Napolitano, wrote in relation to President Obama’s directive that ICE reexamine enforcement policies with an eye toward making them more “humane.” To that end, he says ICE “should eliminate ‘non-criminal re-entrants and immigration fugitives’ as a priority category for deportation.”

What that means is that people who have been formally deported and then sneak back in should be exempted from further attempts at removing them, even though re-entry after deportation is a felony. Also, he wants to exempt from deportation the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who have been ordered deported but ignored the order and simply absconded. He says, in the obligatory “to be sure” paragraph, “To be sure, those who repeatedly cross our borders illegally or abscond from the immigration court bear culpability” — but if they’re exempt from being taken into custody and removed from the country, what does that culpability mean? It’s not like they’re going to be prosecuted, even though reentry after deportation and absconding from court are both criminal offenses.

He’s not just blue-skying this idea; it’s clearly the next step being considered in the administration’s unilateral amnesty push. It wouldn’t confer legal status on any illegal aliens (unlike the president’s illegal DACA/DREAM amnesty) but would solidify the status of immigration violations as secondary offenses. An example of a secondary offense is not wearing your seatbelt (in many states, anyway) — the police can’t stop you just for that, but if they stop you for, say, speeding, and find you’re also not wearing your seatbelt, they can ticket you for that as well.

This is yet another layer of the onion which makes any rational discussion of immigration policy essentially futile when attempting to deal with the pro-amnesty crowd. More than a year ago, I raised the question of whether the Democrats and their pro-amnesty allies would be willing to settle the issue once and for all as to whether or not illegal immigration was a crime. It seemed to me that until you could answer that fundamental question, there was really no path forward to discuss anything else. Clearly, I was mistaken.

Sandweg highlight’s something which is already going on to some extent in the Justice Department and could clearly be taken much further. If you can’t gain any ground in getting the Legislative branch to decriminalize entry by illegal aliens, apparently you can just leave the current laws on the books but fail to enforce them. Or, on a related note, treat the crime as such an afterthought that there is no longer any disincentive to violating the law.

That leads us to the larger question – one which has been debated over a number of presidencies. At what point does a government divided into three ostensibly equal branches break down in effectiveness if they refuse to play their part in the overall contract? What does the Supreme Court do if it issues a ruling but can find no strong arm to enforce its decision? What recourse does the Legislative branch have if the duly elected members pass laws, but the judicial wing of the Executive fails to hold violators to account? It seems that this particular dodge exposes the reality that the White House has much stronger cards to play if the three branches come into conflict.

We’ll close with one of Krikorian’s observations on the subject.

This administration is engaged in executive nullification on a scale that threatens the constitutional order. Rather than trying to bamboozle voters into accepting an amnesty, the Republican leadership should be devoting itself to soberly and calmly making the case to the public that this administration is setting precedents that our children will come to regret.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

People who immigrate, legally or illegally, as a group absolutely DO seek to recreate the conditions they’ve left behind in their native land. They do so because it is human nature to seek the familiar, and, not finding it, create it.

How do you suppose Little Korea, Chinatown, Little Italy, the Barrio, etc. spring into being?

These enclaves exist… and persist…because those who share a commonality of culture and experience seek inevitably to recreate their homeland in their new surroundings and band together. It gives them a sense of security and community to be surrounded by a slice of their nation of origin… and it is the single greatest obstacle to assimilation into the nation and culture they’ve insinuated themselves.

It is only through generations, with comparatively rare exception, through their children and their children’s children, that these new immigrants assimilate into the host culture.

WTH! I don’t know what all of the arguing is about. The bottom line is that you have to enter this country legally and obey the laws regulating your stay here. If you don’t follow the law, you’re illegal and should be deported.

Last year there were 383,000 deportations. 270,000 were exterior deportations (meaning not interdicted within our borders). The balance of 113,000 were folks who were caught in the good ole’ USA being either a felon or being here with an outstanding warrant from outside our borders or just unlucky……to further explain; Of the 113,000…… only 13,000 were here “clean”…but 10,000 of them were red flagged for security reasons. Thus, only 3,000 were deportations in the true sense of the word.

Non-white mass immigration in all white countries and only in white countries plus forced assimilation means a future without any white people. That’s genocide.

That’s always been the real issue. “Progressives” want to create an imagined blended humanity in place of any and all existing white societies; conservatives largely consist of the people being replaced, who don’t want to be replaced, individually or collectively, personally or nationally.

Instead of arguing the real issue, conservatives have argued against illegal immigration (fatally ignoring legal mass immigration, which goes on uncontested), because of a wrong idea that nobody would effectively defend law-breaking.

But that’s wrong. They can defend it, and they do. (All the pious cant about the sanctity of the law that the left goes on with whenever judges give them another win on affirmative action, gay marriage or some other issue they hold dear is purely expedient.)

So focusing on the “illegal” part of illegal mass immigration, as though this would all be fine if only the legal forms were followed, is useless as well as inadequate.

MJTraitor has already made it clear why he supports rampant illegal immigration. He wants to destroy conservatives and Christians by diluting their vote and lurching the country further left into oblivion. He’s stated as much when he enthusiastically endorsed Romney.

He’s an enemy of an American that believes in the constitution that our Founding Fathers wrote and our blood have protected with their lives. No use engaging a man that hates you f or your very existence.

But that’s wrong. They can defend it, and they do. (All the pious cant about the sanctity of the law that the left goes on with whenever judges give them another win on affirmative action, gay marriage or some other issue they hold dear is purely expedient.)

So focusing on the “illegal” part of illegal mass immigration, as though this would all be fine if only the legal forms were followed, is useless as well as inadequate.

I think the Republicans really need to sit back and get their messaging straight on this issue. The Democrats, as always, are successful at framing the issue to suit them. They really don’t care about immigrants their goal is the get votes and to hell with what it does to the country. Illegal immigration is good for no one, and the Democrats know this.

It’s time for the Republicans to go on the attack. “My opponent would like to remove all border agents and just open the borders to anyone from any country that wants to come here.” “My opponent is in favor of unemployment for American citizens and wants to make it more difficult for them to find jobs because people, who are here illegally, will work for less and don’t get paid Social Security, etc.”

These are just a couple of examples, the point is the Republicans are always defending the law, which the Democrats could care less about. They need to use the law to justify their position and tell people what goes on without the law. If you really want open borders, this is the potential result. I think they can win an honest debate but they really need to frame it properly.

I think the Republicans really need to sit back and get their messaging straight on this issue. The Democrats, as always, are successful at framing the issue to suit them. They really don’t care about immigrants their goal is the get votes and to hell with what it does to the country. Illegal immigration is good for no one, and the Democrats know this.

It’s time for the Republicans to go on the attack. “My opponent would like to remove all border agents and just open the borders to anyone from any country that wants to come here.” “My opponent is in favor of unemployment for American citizens and wants to make it more difficult for them to find jobs because people, who are here illegally, will work for less and don’t get paid Social Security, etc.”

These are just a couple of examples, the point is the Republicans are always defending the law, which the Democrats could care less about. They need to use the law to justify their position and tell people what goes on without the law. If you really want open borders, this is the potential result. I think they can win an honest debate but they really need to frame it properly.

bflat879 on March 30, 2014 at 7:51 AM

Find me a Republican who believes in the law and can convince me that they do. The message isn’t the problem. Guys like Marco Rubio and John McCain are the problem. The folks within the Republican Party that don’t believe the shit they’re shoveling is the problem. Unless and until you get the party’s actions in line with its messaging, there will continue to be suspicion on the part of voters.

The Democrats want open borders to ensure their electoral supremacy. The GOP Elitists want open borders for H1B job stealers because they are loser sellouts who don’t have a moral fiber between them. But none of this matters, because immigration is a mass distraction against throwing all those politician bums out.

Every time the people get restless, some unimportant issue is thrown out there for them to chew on. These elitist jerks think of us rabble out here as a bunch of vermin to be dominated, and anyone who puts party above reality is guilty of falling right into that trap willingly.

It should be obvious to any patriot that the real problem is the aristocracy in this country. They are orchestrating the destruction of the middle class, as they have always done in times past. The historical pattern that has emerged when the elite gain too much power is that some type of king appears and tips the balance of power the other way. Do we want a king here, ruling over the rubble?

This immigration issue is being used to paint any opposition to Democrats and Progressivism as support for slavery. Skin color is used to tar and feather anyone who even whispers the word immigration. Any Republican who repeats this stupid mantra deserves to be called the racist they are, because its so easy to be smart and avoid your enemies slings and arrows while pushing your own agenda instead of theirs.

That’s the real legacy Reagan left, and the current pikers who run the GOP can’t hold a candle to him.

Boehner and McConnell are nothing more than facilitators of the destruction. They have traded the power we have vested in them as owners of this government, and traded it for the trinkets of politics and personal luxury. They are not leaders. They are accomplices and Vichy rulers.

There is nobody to fight for the common man in Washington. Period. All opposition to this historic lack of temerity and honor cannot simply be blamed on some faction such as the Tea Party? Since when did well-articulated, purposeful opposition become undemocratic or worthy of ad hominems in pace of an intellectual response?
Rhetorically, it is since those bereft of leadership, wisdom, courage and honor have occupied all auspices of our government. And nothing will change until they are gone.

I fear Republicans in a majority position almost as equally as I fear the Democrats. They’ve shown nothing in a minority position that presages a great shift or rescue from this morass. Quite the contrary. Republicans have shown they will be equally feckless, slow moving and destructive. In the House, where we do have power, there has been nothing but excuses, more aggressive movement against our own party and meaningless legislation underwritten by twisted, incomprehensible and poorly articulated illogical nonsense.

There is no courage in Washington. Only occupants concerned with either their own well being or intent to destroy this nation. It is a swamp that needs to be drained. Until that is done, nothing will change. Nothing.

There is no courage in Washington. Only occupants concerned with either their own well being or intent to destroy this nation. It is a swamp that needs to be drained. Until that is done, nothing will change. Nothing.

Marcus Traianus on March 30, 2014 at 9:40 AM

Drain the swamp, and there will be someone right there behind you to fill it as you go. If you’re tired of living near a swamp, move somplace else.

Perhaps the US Govt should take a close look at adopting the following verbiage taken from a particularly right wing militia manual:

-Foreigners are admitted into the United States “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.”
-Immigration officials must “ensure” that immigrants will not only be useful additions to America, but that they have the necessary funds to sustain themselves and their dependents.
-Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics”; if they are deemed to be detrimental to “economic or national interests”; if they have broken United Staes laws; and if they are not found to be “physically or mentally healthy.”
-The Secretary of Governance may “suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners” if he determines such action to be in the national interest.”

Admittedly a bit right-wingy racisty, but these are desperate times and we should….wait, what’s that? This was excerpted from MEXICAN immigration laws replacing Mexico with United States? Hmm…how can this be with LIBS and the pres of Meh-hi-co lecturing us on our intolerance?

It’s really not a complicated problem. Enforce the laws. This mean enforce our national sovereignty and borders whether you agree or not. If you don’t agree, legislate and get laws changed to suit your needs if you can. And yes, this means enforcing ALL borders including those with predominantly white folks coming over.

I have a question. The fence shown with this story resembles the fence protecting Israel from incursion. If Israel can do it what is our problem – to much attention being paid to diversity vs. defense.

The Republicans problem is their in a conflict over votes and the right thing. The press is supporting the Democrats on this issue by not discussing the real issues, the Republicans need to get past the vote thing and fight for the right thing. It’s going to be hard for some of them.

Rubio, is less of a problem than McCain. McCain is looking for votes, Rubio is looking for a solution to the problem. Rubio tried to work with the Democrats and they put out crap legislation and attached it to Rubio. I think Rubio learned a lesson about dealing with Schumer and company, so he’s going his own way. McCain, on the other hand, would sign on to anything to win.

The Republicans problem is their in a conflict over votes and the right thing. The press is supporting the Democrats on this issue by not discussing the real issues, the Republicans need to get past the vote thing and fight for the right thing. It’s going to be hard for some of them.

Rubio, is less of a problem than McCain. McCain is looking for votes, Rubio is looking for a solution to the problem. Rubio tried to work with the Democrats and they put out crap legislation and attached it to Rubio. I think Rubio learned a lesson about dealing with Schumer and company, so he’s going his own way. McCain, on the other hand, would sign on to anything to win.

bflat879 on March 30, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Rubio’s a liar. McCain’s a liar. You can’t find 10 honest people in Congress and I bet you couldn’t find 50 honest people employed in any capacity on Capitol Hill.

I have the same beliefs but I simply believe that HotAir’s conservatives only support enforcement of immigration laws because they dislike the people violating them due to their ethnicity or political preferences.

Federati on March 29, 2014 at 6:14 PM

It’s difficult to comment meaningfully when one is so late the commenting, as appears I am at this stage (page three of comments).

BUT, while reading through earlier comments, I did want to at least post my retorts to “Federati”‘s above.

The current splurge — if not, tidal wave — of illegal aliens made possible by Obama’s refusal to do his job, which is, enforcing our laws, originate in Socialist if not Communist countries.

It’s not “the people” involved by race or ethnicity that is the issue, nor is what is ojected to by me and others who share my views (are “anti-amnesty” and want our laws enforced against illegal immigration), but the POLITICS that are involved: a very large influx of Socialist, Communist, Marxist believers who are being encouraged by lax enforcement if not outright permission to alter the RULE OF LAW (our Constitutional guiding line) of this nation.

Mexico is often mentioned as responsible for this (and it is), but so is China. Central America, China, Mexico, among others, are and have been for a while now quite Letwing/Communist/Socialist as areas and the populations from those areas arrive in the US and expect if not demand the same to exist here.

SO it’s not “race” that is the objection, it is the politics being imported. Out shopping earlier this week, few I encountered or even passed on the sidewalk could or did even speak English, most spoke various dialects of Chinese or Spanish.

…precisely the reason that the reconquistadores are a group unto their own. There absolutely is a group of Mexican immigrants who have no intention whatsoever of being American. And you can hear their disgust for America shine through at La Raza rallies and every time they flaunt their Matricula Consular cards as they get pulled over in California without driver licenses. It’s not that the people themselves are a malignant cancer; their ideology is.

gryphon202 on March 29, 2014 at 6:16 PM

Exactly right.

Same as to nearly all, to a specific individual, among the Asian immigrants I encounter nearly daily in the West. They nearly all, every one of them, find Obama fascinating BECAUSE OF HIS RACE, are blind to his flippancy about our Constitution, and expect “government” AND the DNC to behave something akin to wealthy grandparents where their wants and needs are concerned. Only exception I encounter are the Japanese, who nearly all are opposite of that, just described.

IT’s not their race, their ethnicities, that are the issue or the objection. It is the Leftwing, Socialist if not outright Communist views they believe in, and want replicated here in the US — while many among them are here illegally and don’t consider any problem with that, either.

All these people wanting to come here to ‘do the jobs that Americans won’t do’ are here because they have a low overhead cost to them as none of the laws for labor and employment are applied to them and can’t be applied to them as they are not citizens.

Make them citizens and you price them out of the job they were in: they have become citizens and will now have that burdening rate thrust upon us by the federal government. They won’t have jobs once they become citizens and will join the class of Americans that don’t want to do those jobs.

Want an effective control on this? Punish businesses and individuals who DO employ illegals at the personal and company level. A Three Strikes policy would do wonders.

First offense, minor fine and a few months at Club Fed… for all of those in the hiring chain from the CEO or President of the company on down.

Second offense, major fine, say 10% of gross earnings across the board, and a felony for each individual in the hiring chain, say 5 years.

Third offense and the company is immediately shut down, its goods sold off piecemeal at auction so that no bidder or group of bidders gets more than 10% of the company, with excess sold for scrap value, all creditors paid with those funds, and everyone in the hiring chain looking at 20 years in jail.

Only individuals could see a repeat of a third offense problem but, really, if you are hiring gardeners and maids and such, after your first 20 year stint you should be getting a clue.

Take away the magnet that attracts such labor, fine and imprison those who think that THEIR foreign policy should RULE over the Nation, and let them know that their meager wishes to dictate to everyone else has a price tag to it.

Really, this is a species of treason to do these activities, and a Three Strikes rule is much, much kinder than the alternative and gives companies and individuals a chance to mend their ways, straighten up and fly right.

Sired by an Anti-Colonialist whos considered Great Britain and the United States to be pillagers who became great by stealing the wealth and resources of others, whose desire was to reduce these countries’ influence in the world…

Tutored by Grank Marashal Davis, the most prominent Communist in the U.S. at the time…

Influenced by the writings of Socialist Saul Alinsky to the point of quoting from his book ‘Rules for Radicals’ during an inauguration speech…

This President, who hated this nation as it was established by our Founding Fathers and run according to the Constitution for over 200 years, vowed to fundamentally change the United States if elected President…

…and he consinues to wage his WAR against our Founding Fathers, against the Constitution, against the Rule Of Law, against the citizens of this nation, and continues to be the nation’s #1 threat to its status and very existence!

He has undermined and weakened this nation ecomically, helped the resurgence of our enemies – aiding Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood take over their own countries while giving free reign to Putin to take European/NATO nations in order to rebuild the USSR, has projected weakness, cowardice, and indecision throughout the world – inviting violence throughout the world, openly disregards the Constitution, and violates the very Rule of Law he vowed to uphold.

Where are the elected members of the House and 100 Senators, who took an oath before God and the American people to protect the Constitution, to enforce the Rule of Law, and protect this nation from enemies foreign AND DOMSTIC? Where are the American people, the nation’s/Constitution’s/Law’s protective last resort in light of an elected Congress that has surrendered to the enemy that is destroying this nation piece by piece?

When we were a young nation, we needed new citizens to fill us up and make us strong. At over 319 million, we should be more selective. Just because people sneak in or overstay their visa is not reason enough to let them remain. We need people with skills and education, not the opposite.
We need people in power who understand this and will do something about it.